The benevolence so much boasted of by
Freemasonry is a sham; and the morality of the institution is
opposed to both law and Gospel.

The law of God requires universal
benevolence, supreme love to God, and equal love to our
neighbor--that is, to all mankind.

This the Gospel also requires, and this is
undeniable. But does Masonry inculcate this morality? and is this
Masonic benevolence?

By no means. Masonic oaths require partial
benevolence; or, strictly, they require no benevolence at all. For
real benevolence is universal in its own nature. It is
good-willing; that is, it consists in willing the well-being or
good of universal being--and that for its own sake, and not
because the good belongs to this or that particular
individual.

In other words, true benevolence is
necessarily impartial. But Masonic oaths not only do not require
impartial and universal benevolence, but they require the exact
opposite of this. The law and Gospel of God allow and require us
to discriminate in our doing good between the holy and the
wicked.

They require us to do good as we have
opportunity to all men, but especially to the household of faith.
But the Masonic oaths make no such discriminations as this, nor do
they allow it. These oaths require Masons to discriminate between
Masons and those that are not Masons; giving the preference to
Masons, even if they are not Christians, rather than to Christians
if they are not Masons.

Now this is directly opposite to both the
law and the Gospel. But this is the benevolence and morality of
Freemasonry, undeniably.

The law and the Gospel require our
discriminations in our treatment of men to be conditional upon
their holiness and likeness to God and their faith in Jesus
Christ.

But the oaths of Freemasons require their
discriminations to be founded upon the mere relation of a brother
Mason, whatever his Christian or moral character may
be.

Now this, I say again, is not only not in
accordance with Christian morality, and with the law and Gospel of
God; but it is directly opposed to both law and Gospel.

But, again, the utter want of true
benevolence in the Masonic institution will further appear if we
consider the exclusiveness of the institution. A minister in
Cleveland, recently defending the institution of Masonry, declared
that the glory of Masonry consists in its exclusiveness. But is
this in accordance with the benevolence required in the
Gospel?

Masonry, observe, professes to be a
benevolent institution. But, first, it excludes all women from a
participation in its rights, ceremonies, privileges, and
blessings, whatever they may be. Secondly, it excludes all old men
in their dotage. Thirdly, it excludes all young men in their
nonage; that is, under twenty-one years of age. Several other
classes are excluded; but these that I have named comprise a vast
majority, probably not less than two-thirds of all mankind. Again,
they admit no deformed person, and none but those who are
physically perfect. In short, they admit none who are likely to
become chargeable to the institution.

Now, is this benevolence, or Gospel
morality? No, indeed! It is the very opposite of Gospel morality
or true benevolence. In a recent number of the National
Freemason--I think its date is the 18th of January--it is admitted
by the editor of that great national organ that benevolent
institutions have been so much multiplied that there is now seldom
any call upon Masons for charitable donations. Yes; but who has
multiplied these benevolent societies? Surely Masons have not done
this. Christians have done it. And Masonry now seems forced to
admit that Christian benevolence has covered the whole field, and
left them nothing to do. So far as I have had experience in
Freemasonry, I can say that I do not recollect a single instance
in which the lodge to which I belonged ever gave any money to any
charitable object whatever.

As a Freemason, I never was called upon,
and to my recollection I never gave a cent as a Freemason, either
to an individual as a matter of charity or to any object whatever.
My dues and fees to the lodges, of course, I paid regularly; but
that the money thus collected was given to any charitable object
whatever I do not believe.

Again, Freemasonry, at the best, is but a
mutual insurance company. Their oaths pledge them to assist each
other, if in distress or in necessitous circumstances; and each
other's families, if left in want. This they can well afford to
do, on the principle of mutual insurance: for they have vast sums,
almost incalculable in amount, taking the whole fraternity
together; and they can lay out almost any amount of money in
fitting up their sumptuous lodges of the higher degrees, in
building Masonic temples, in seeking each other's promotion to
office, and in defending each other in case any one of them
commits a crime and is liable to suffer for it.

The following estimate, taken from a note
in the revised edition of Bernard's "Light on Masonry," p. 96,
will give some idea how large are the sums held by Masons.
"Supposing that in the United States there are 500,000 entered
apprentices, 400,000 masters, and 200,000 royal arch Masons, also
10,000 knights, and that they all paid the usual fees for the
degrees, the amount would be the enormous sum of 11,250,000
dollars; the yearly interest of which, at 7 per cent, is 787,500
dollars, which sum (allowing 100 dollars. to each individual)
would support 7,875 persons.

Now I ask, Do Masons by their charities,
support this number of poor in the United States? Do they support
one-tenth part of this number? Supposing they do, is it necessary
to give 10, or 50 dollars for the privilege of contributing 1, 5,
or 50 dollars masonically? Must the privilege of being a
charitable man be bought with gold? How many there are who have
rendered themselves incompetent to bestow charities, by their
payment for and attendance on Masonic secrets and ceremonies! If
all the money paid for the degrees of Masonry was applied to
charitable purposes, the subject would appear differently; but it
is principally devoted to the erection of Masonic temples, support
of the grand lodges, and for refreshment for the craft, and I
think I may add, for their support in kidnapping and
murder."

It is no doubt true that but a very small
part of their funds is ever used for the support of even their own
poor. If it is, it behooves them to show it, and let the public
know. They boast much of their benevolence; and the charities of
Freemasons are frequently compared with those of the church--and
that, too, boastfully; they maintaining that they are more
benevolent and charitable, and do more for the poor and destitute
than even the church has done.

But let us look at this. Is there any truth
in all this boasting? What has Freemasonry done for general
education in any part of the world? Let them tell us. Again, what
has Freemasonry done for the general poor? Nothing. What have they
done for their own poor, as a matter of charity and benevolence?
Ab-solutely nothing. They have not even disbursed the funds which
have been paid in for that purpose. Let them show, if they can,
that, on the principle of a mutual insurance society they have
faithfully paid out to their own poor that fund which has been
paid in by Masons for the purpose of securing to themselves and
families, in case they should be reduced to poverty, what would
meet their absolute necessities. We challenge them to show any
such thing. We challenge them to show that, on the principle of
benevolence and charity, they have really done anything for either
the general poor or their own poor. They compare themselves with
the Church of Christ in this respect! What have they done for the
Southern poor during our great struggle, and during the long
period of starvation and distress that has reigned in the South?
What have Freemasons, as such, done for the freedmen? And what are
they now doing? What have they done in any age of the world, as
Freemasons, for Christian missions, for the conversion of the
world, for the salvation of the souls of men? What! compare
themselves boastfully with the Church of God, as being more
benevolent than Christians?

The fact is, the Church of Christ has done
ten thousand times as much for humanity as they have ever done.
And she has not done it on the principle of a mutual insurance
company, but as a matter of true benevolence; including in her
charities the poor, the lowly, the halt and the blind, the old and
the young, the black and the white.

The Church of Christ has done more for the
bodies of men, ten thousand times more, than Freemasonry has ever
done or ever will do.

Besides, the Church of Christ has poured
out its treasure like a flood to enlighten mankind generally, to
save their souls, and to do them good both for time and eternity.
But what has Freemasonry done in this respect? Their boasted
benevolence is a sham. I admit that they do sometimes afford
relief to an indigent brother Mason, and to the families of such.
I admit that they have often done this. But I maintain that this
is not done as an act of Christian charity, but only as an act of
Masonic charity; and that Masonic charity is only the part payment
of a debt. Masons pay in their money to the Masonic fund; and this
fund is that out of which their poor are helped, when they are
helped at all.

What individuals do for individuals, on
rare occasions, is but a trifle. Indeed, it is seldom that they
are called on as individuals. The help granted to the poor is
almost always taken from the funds of the lodges. And I seriously
doubt whether there is a lodge in the United States that has ever
paid as much for the support of their own poor as has been paid in
to their funds by those who have joined the lodge. Let it be
understood, then, that their boast of benevolence and of Christian
morality is utterly false. Their oaths do not pledge them at all
to the performance of any truly Christian morality; but to a
Masonic benevolence, which is the opposite of true Christian
morality.

Instead, therefore, of Masonry's
inculcating really sound morality, instead of its being almost or
quite true religion, the very perfection of that morality which
their oaths oblige them to practice is anti-Christian, and opposed
to both the law and Gospel of God. It is partial. And here let me
again appeal to the dear young men who have been persuaded to join
the Masonic fraternity under the impression that it is a
benevolent institution. Do not, my dear young men, suffer
yourselves to be deceived in this respect. If you have well
considered what the law and Gospel require, you will soon perceive
that the benevolence and morality required by your Masonic oaths
is not Gospel morality or true benevolence at all; but that it is
altogether a spurious and selfish morality. Indeed, you yourselves
are aware that you joined the lodge from selfish motives; and that
the morality inculcated by Masons is an exclusive, one-sided, and
selfish affair altogether. In some of the lectures, you are aware
that occasionally the duty of universal good-will is, in few
words, inculcated. But you also know that your oaths, which lay
down the rule of your duty in this respect, require no such thing
as universal and impartial benev-olence; but that they require the
opposite of this. That is, they require you to prefer a Mason
because he is a Mason to a Christian because he is a Christian;
and, instead of requiring you to do good especially to the
household of faith, your oaths require you to do good especially
to those who are Freemasons, whether they belong to the household
of faith or not. But this you know to be anti-Christian, and not
according the Gospel. But you know also that Christians devote
themselves to doing good to Masons and to those who are not
Masons, to all classes and descriptions of men. And this they do,
not on the principle, as I have said, of a mutual insurance
society, but as a mere matter of benevolence. They deny themselves
for the sake of doing good to the most lowly and even to the most
wicked men.

Do not allow yourselves, therefore, to
suppose that there is any good in Masonry. We often hear it said,
and sometimes by professed Christians and Christian ministers,
that "Masonry is a good thing."

But be not deceived. If by good is intended
morally good, the assertion is false. There is nothing morally
good in Freemasonry. If there are any good men who are Freemasons,
Freemasonry has not made them so; but Christianity has made them
so. They are good not by virtue of their Freemasonry, but by
virtue of their Christianity. They have not been made good by
anything they have found in Freemasonry; but, if they are good,
they have been made good by Christianity, in spite of Freemasonry.
I must say that I have always been ashamed of Freemasons whenever
I have read, in their orations, or in the sermons of ministers who
have eulogized it, or in their eulogistic books, the pretense that
Freemasonry is a benevolent institution. Many have claimed it to
be religion, and true religion. This question I shall examine in
another place. But the thing I wish to fix your especial attention
upon in the conclusion of this article is, that Freemasonry has no
just claims to Christian morality or benevolence; but that in its
best estate it is only partiality, and the doing in a very
slovenly manner the work of a mutual insurance company.

This
file is CERTIFIED BY GOSPEL TRUTH MINISTRIES TO BE CONFORMED
TO THE ORIGINAL TEXT. For authenticity verification, its
contents can be compared to the original file at
www.GospelTruth.net
or by contacting Gospel Truth P.O. Box 6322, Orange, CA
92863. (C)2000. This file is not to be changed in any way,
nor to be sold, nor this seal to be
removed.